On 12/21/16 4:40 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2016-12-21 16:35:28 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
What I think "progress LSN"
is getting at -- actually fairly well -- is whether we're getting
anything *important* done, not whether we are consistent. I don't
mind changing the name, but not to consistency LSN.
Well, progress could just as well be replay. Or the actual insertion
point. Or up to where we've written out. Or synced out. Or
replicated....
Open to other suggestions - I'm not really happy with consistency LSN,
but definitely unhappy with progress LSN.
MinConsistencyLSN?
--
-David
da...@pgmasters.net
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
